SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: surfbaron who wrote (20767)6/21/2003 6:36:35 PM
From: Raymond Duray  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
BUSH LIES DEPT.: Bush attempts fraud on Sept. 11th

surfbaron,

The "patterns" you see may just be the psychedelic meanderings of your synapses. <g>

********
OTOH, here's another example of the shameless dishonesty of the Bush crime club and their dereliction of duty to the citizens of the U.S.A. Bush is a the true traitor to his nation, engaging us in a Middle East quagmire based on hookum, bluster and lies:

truthout.org
fair.org

Media Silent on Clark's 9/11 Comments
Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting

Friday 20 June 2003

Gen. says White House pushed Saddam link without evidence

Sunday morning talk shows like ABC's This Week or Fox News Sunday often make news for
days afterward. Since prominent government officials dominate the guest lists of the programs, it
is not unusual for the Monday editions of major newspapers to report on interviews done by the
Sunday chat shows.

But the June 15 edition of NBC's Meet the Press was unusual for the buzz that it didn't generate.
Former General Wesley Clark told anchor Tim Russert that Bush administration officials had
engaged in a campaign to implicate Saddam Hussein in the September 11 attacks-- starting that
very day. Clark said that he'd been called on September 11 and urged to link Baghdad to the terror attacks, but declined to do so because of a lack of evidence.

Here is a transcript of the exchange:

CLARK: "There was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001, starting immediately
after 9/11, to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein."

RUSSERT: "By who? Who did that?"

CLARK: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the
White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a
call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored
terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'But--I'm willing to
say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence."

Clark's assertion corroborates a little-noted CBS Evening News story that aired on September 4,
2002. As correspondent David Martin reported: "Barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77
plowed into the Pentagon, the secretary of defense was telling his aides to start thinking about
striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks."
According to CBS, a Pentagon aide's notes from that day quote Rumsfeld asking for the "best info
fast" to "judge whether good enough to hit SH at the same time, not only UBL." (The initials SH
and UBL stand for Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.) The notes then quote Rumsfeld as
demanding, ominously, that the administration's response "go massive...sweep it all up, things
related and not."

Despite its implications, Martin's report was greeted largely with silence when it aired. Now, nine
months later, media are covering damaging revelations about the Bush administration's
intelligence on Iraq, yet still seem strangely reluctant to pursue stories suggesting that the flawed
intelligence-- and therefore the war-- may have been a result of deliberate deception, rather than
incompetence. The public deserves a fuller accounting of this story.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes.)